Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (451742)	1/28/2009 5:47:49 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574491

Again what does any of this have to do with "its an area that was conquered by Israel after the Arabs had attacked Israel multiple times", or my original statement - "Yes, they started to take it over in response to a series of Arab invasions."? In response to that statement (which was true) I get "read your history", and "What the hell are you talking about?", but none of the statements are an argument against mine. They may be an argument for the Palestinian position, or against the Israeli position in larger terms, but they have nothing to do with my statements. If you (and Alighieri) think a certain statement I make (not just my overall position but a specific statement) is horribly wrong, to the point of making responses like the one I quote above, then you should show how it is. If you insist on not doing so, but still saying "what the hell are you talking about", then you should at least make a relevant response, or explicitly change the topic. Instead you go on, with statements that don't support your "What the hell are you talking about?", or Alighieri's "read your history", to the slightest extent. Its not that your statements are wrong, its that right or wrong, there irrelevant, and your acting as if they are relevant.